Literature DB >> 24463666

Value of symptom-triggered diagnostic evaluation for ovarian cancer.

M Robyn Andersen1, Kimberly A Lowe, Barbara A Goff.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the potential harms and ovarian cancer outcomes associated with symptom-triggered diagnostic evaluation of all women with symptoms of ovarian cancer.
METHODS: Five thousand twelve women older than age 40 years were prospectively enrolled in a cohort study of proactive symptom-triggered diagnostic evaluation. Women who tested positive on a symptom index were offered testing with CA 125 and transvaginal ultrasonography. Results of these tests and any subsequent procedures were recorded. Assessment of ovarian cancer outcomes for all participants through Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results was performed 1 year after enrollment was complete.
RESULTS: A positive symptom index was found in 241 (4.8%) participating patients, and 211 (88%) underwent CA 125 testing, transvaginal ultrasound screening, or both. Twenty surgical procedures (laparoscopy, laparotomy, vaginal) were performed in the study population (0.4% of participating women). However, only six (0.12%) were performed for a suspicious ovarian mass and only four (0.08%) were performed solely as a result of study participation. A total of eight ovarian cancers were diagnosed, 31-843 days after symptom assessment (50% distant, 50% local or regional). Of the two cancers diagnosed within 6 months, one was symptom index-positive.
CONCLUSIONS: Proactive symptom-triggered diagnostic evaluation for ovarian cancer results in minimal unindicated surgery. A small number of ovarian cancers was identified solely on the basis of symptom-triggered diagnostic testing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24463666      PMCID: PMC3904679          DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000051

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  5 in total

1.  Modified Goff Symptom Index: Simple triage tool for ovarian malignancy.

Authors:  Jyothi Shetty; P Priyadarshini; Deeksha Pandey; A P Manjunath
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2015-08-24

2.  Recognizing Gynecological Cancer in Primary Care: Risk Factors, Red Flags, and Referrals.

Authors:  Garth Funston; Helena O'Flynn; Neil A J Ryan; Willie Hamilton; Emma J Crosbie
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 3.845

Review 3.  Identifying Ovarian Cancer in Symptomatic Women: A Systematic Review of Clinical Tools.

Authors:  Garth Funston; Victoria Hardy; Gary Abel; Emma J Crosbie; Jon Emery; Willie Hamilton; Fiona M Walter
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-12-08       Impact factor: 6.639

4.  Direct access from general practice to transvaginal ultrasound for early detection of ovarian cancer: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Marie-Louise Ladegaard Baun; Margit Dueholm; Hanne Nørgaard Heje; William Hamilton; Lone Kjeld Petersen; Peter Vedsted
Journal:  Scand J Prim Health Care       Date:  2021-06-07       Impact factor: 2.581

5.  Refining Ovarian Cancer Test accuracy Scores (ROCkeTS): protocol for a prospective longitudinal test accuracy study to validate new risk scores in women with symptoms of suspected ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Sudha Sundar; Caroline Rick; Francis Dowling; Pui Au; Kym Snell; Nirmala Rai; Rita Champaneria; Hilary Stobart; Richard Neal; Clare Davenport; Susan Mallett; Andrew Sutton; Sean Kehoe; Dirk Timmerman; Tom Bourne; Ben Van Calster; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Usha Menon; Jon Deeks
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.